John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[BADOLBILZ]

3 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This list smacks of simply repeating excuses circulated by the Bills FO to cover their collective backsides for making poor decisions. 

 

 

 

 

In fairness to John..........he's a journalist and he follows a team that has had a bad PR department and a FO that has had a bad relationship with the media for decades now................Beane is extraordinary at making people feel comfortable dealing with him and it makes it exponentially easier to sell his goods to the media.      In most business environments you are constantly fed the soft touch.   It's sales 101 and is something you learn to filter out..........but it's kinda' new for people who follow the Bills for a living though.   

 

You can see the McBeane sales job in John's framing of points.    He clearly wants to believe McDermott and Beane.   And that's fine.......we all do.........none of us are here to root against the FO.........but the question isn't whether McBeane are sincere it's whether they are actually good enough to separate the franchise from the pack of mediocre-to-bad teams that they always find themselves in over the past couple decades.    

 

Actions speak louder than the sales pitch.........as you point out later in your post, there have been lot's of mistakes and many of them are clear repeats of past failures.   If there is one thing we should know as Bills fans by now it's what DOESN'T work.    And for all the DNA talk the organization has the same record as it had after two years of re-build under Marrone and two years of re-tool under Rex.    

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, teef said:

Yet another poster that’s tons of fun. 

 

 

Man.......the passive aggressive "get off my lawn" stuff is really taking it's toll on your one-liners.  

 

 

[teef]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Man.......the passive aggressive "get off my lawn" stuff is really taking it's toll on your one-liners.  

 

 

Don’t be upset because I call you out on your drama. When you decide to post like an adult, you’ll be treated like one. For now, the adults are talking.  Take a back seat. 

[Logic]

4 hours ago, Shortchaz said:

It’s the off-season, so of course the Bills are better ?.

 

not to be Debbie downer, but this is part of the pattern for NFL teams and it’s by design. The team is trying to sell tickets. Everything is going in the right direction yet we’re projected to win 6.5 games. 

 

As a fan of football it’s hard to not be excited about the unknown, but if I’ve learned anything from being a fan of the Bills, my expectations, which have historically been based on what is put forward by the front office and repeated by the press, rarely match reality when the season starts, e.g. the first two games of last season.

 

 It’s fun to talk about and excitement will continue to grow until the season, but my expectations for this season are 6.5 wins. I’ve moved to the “show me” stage of my fandom.

Any time someone starts a sentence with "Not to be a Debbie Downer", I just immediately stop reading. 

[BADOLBILZ]

14 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

Love all the info @john wawrow. Thanks for sharing! 

 

 

I will add that it's good to see the members of the board treating @john wawrow in a more civil manner than they would have years ago.   Not that he's new but he doesn't always get as involved in discussions as this. 

 

I guess I gotta' give a tip of the cap to moderation on that.     In the Beerball days some of the circular jerkulars would have encircled a media member just to show that they don't care who he is.    We can agree to disagree on Bills matters.

48 minutes ago, teef said:

Don’t be upset because I call you out on your drama. When you decide to post like an adult, you’ll be treated like one. For now, the adults are talking.  Take a back seat. 

 

 

What are you talking about?    ( Man it's worse than I thought.)  Lighten up, Franny.

 

 

[John from Riverside]

3 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

This list smacks of simply repeating excuses circulated by the Bills FO to cover their collective backsides for making poor decisions. 

 

Don't give me this "They never anticipated losing Wood and Incognito" BS.   Yes, Wood's force retirement was an unexpected blow, but Incognito was 36 years old.   A competent FO anticipates that 36 year old OLers just might not be around too much longer ... or, heaven forbid, OLers might get injured.   Despite losing Incognito and with John Miller having struggled in 2017 and Vlad Ducasse being a career bottom-feeder OG, the Bills finally got around to drafting their one and only 2018 OLer at the end of the fifth round.

 

Technically, the Bills had Tyrod Taylor and Nathan Peterman on the payroll at the beginning of free agency, and then traded Taylor to the Browns a day after the FA began.   McCarron was signed after Taylor was traded.   If FA WRs chose to sign elsewhere because of the QB situation, that's on Beane/McDermott for choosing to have such inexperienced/incompetent (Peterman) QBs on the roster.

 

Saying that "they were committed to only spending only so much in free agency, because the objective was to free up as much room under the cap as possible" says that they -- Beane, McDermott, Pegula, all the bean-counters at OBD -- were perfectly okay with spending huge amounts of draft capital to get a first round QB but weren't really interested in seeing him succeed.  How is that significantly different from the way that the Donahoe or the Brandon/Levy/Jauron or the Brandon/Nix/ Whaley regimes operated -- exciting the fan base with individual FA signings or draft picks but never building a quality team to make those signings worthwhile?

 

As for re-signing Woods, I doubt that the Bills ever had any expectations of doing so.   Woods was simply too good to settle for whatever the Bills were willing to offer him.  The last top class WR that the Bills drafted and re-signed for the current market rate for #1 WRs was Eric Moulds.  While Lee Evans was also re-signed, he had never played as well as expected.  

 

It wasn't a case of they couldn't "afford" to re-sign Stephon Gilmore, either.  It's that they chose to not to do so because that's been the Bills practice for decades: draft first round DBs, develop them into top players, and let them walk away in FA rather than pay them.  Only first rounder Leotis McKelvin, who was never more than a competent DB, was re-signed.  Winfield, Clements, Whitner, and Gilmore all left because the Bills decided to draft their replacements rather than pay them.  

 

One of the big reasons that I'm not sold on the Beane and McDermott regime being any more successful than their predecessors is that they've done so many things the same way they've been done in the past.  They seem to be carrying on the tainted legacy of Russ Brandon of putting the making more profit ahead of winning more games.  Before he was hired by the Bills, Brandon's claim to fame was gutting the Florida Marlins the year after they won the 1997 World Series (Fire Sale ).   That shouldn't be surprising since they were both hired while he was in charge of the team, so it's likely they share his views about paying for players.  From your post, it certainly sounds that way, which to my mind doesn't bode well for building a winning franchise on their watch.   The way the entire QB situation was handled in 2018, from not providing Allen with an experienced QB coach to the get-go to keeping Peterman on the roster long after it became clear that the team wouldn't play for him to waiting a month for Anderson and to finally getting around to signing a somewhat competent backup QB only after Anderson got injured doesn't scream "this organization is going to do whatever it needs to do to win games".  It says just the opposite.

 

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not jumping on this bandwagon until it proves itself.  I've been fooled too many times before by the Bills.

Mistakes were made.....good moves were also made.   At the end of the day it always pointed to THIS offseason (and it doesnt matter whether poster's agree if it was the only way to skin a cat or not....THIS WAS THE WAY McBEANE DECIDED TO DO IT.......win or lose....its on them and they deserved the right to do it their way because it was THEIR ASS ON THE LINE and not the armchair GM's out there.

 

So we will see.....Im feeling pretty good about it right now.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:

I know what they did. I don't need a history lesson on what they did.

 

I've just questioned the approach that so many fans claim was the one and only and best way to go about things because Beane and company tell them so. That is all. 

Let's look at the results that you are so highly critical of. In their first year McDermott got a stripped down to make the playoffs for the first time in a generation. Are you going to complain about that? In the second year this regime in accordance with their rebuilding approach made a decision to in bulk absorb the cap so the next year it would have the flexibility to aggressively engage in the free market. That's exactly what happened this offseason.  So what is your complaint? 

 

This regime publicly and repeatedly stated what their strategy was in rebuilding the roster and cap structure. You and some others believe that they should have taken a more incremental and less disruptive approach. That's a reasonable position to take but it was an approach that this regime decided not to take. You may be disgruntled and dissatisfied with their strategy but that was the strategy that they publicly stated they were going to do, and then did it. 

 

(note: I had a problem with the highlighting function. I did not deliberately intend to highlight. )

Edited May 17, 2019 by JohnC
highlight problems

[Dr. Who]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Let's look at the results that you are so highly critical of. In their first year McDermott got a stripped down to make the playoffs for the first time in a generation. Are you going to complain about that? In the second year this regime in accordance with their rebuilding approach made a decision to in bulk absorb the cap so the next year it would have the flexibility to aggressively engage in the free market. That's exactly what happened this offseason.  So what is your complaint? 

 

This regime publicly and repeatedly stated what their strategy was in rebuilding the roster and cap structure. You and some others believe that they should have taken a more incremental and less disruptive approach. That's a reasonable position to take but it was an approach that this regime decided not to take. You may be disgruntled and dissatisfied with their strategy but that was the strategy that they publicly stated they were going to do, and then did it. 

 

(note: I had a problem with the highlighting function. I did not deliberately intend to highlight. )

Don't worry. ScottLaw still isn't going to hear you.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Dr. Who

[JohnC]

23 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

Don't worry. ScottLaw still isn't going to hear you.

His problem has less to do with hearing as it does with his thinking. 

[Dr. Who]

35 minutes ago, JohnC said:

His problem has less to do with hearing as it does with his thinking. 

Some kinds of thinking lead to an inability to hear.

[LSHMEAB]

17 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

You would have spent the money, LSHMEAB? Fine, whatever. They couldn't have done that and follow their plan. Which involved getting the cap in excellent order by this year.

Yes. I would have done everything possible to retain Woods and moved some money around elsewhere. I would have kept Watkins and not acquired Kelvin Benjamin. It would have been great if they were organizationally in position to draft a QB, in which case they would have cut Tyrod making the salary cap issue ENTIRELY moot. 

 

The point of my contention is that they COULD have kept Woods and I believe the cap stuff is completely overblown. They couldn't have kept Gilmore. That I'll concede.

 

For better or worse, they made these decisions. I like many of them and question many of them. Their fate will ultimately be tied to wins and losses. I think we can all agree on that. They decided to tear the whole thing down and start from scratch. The last time we did that was back in the early 2000's with TD. It almost worked.

 

McDermott did an amazing job with a below average roster in 2017 and actually made the playoffs, albeit at 9-7 and one & done. Last season, McDermott eked 6 wins out of a TERRIBLE roster. This is the season I want to see it all come together. I'm really not down with the whole 5 year plan.

 

I'm actually higher on McDermott than most. The blowouts are alarming, but the end result has been a win total that surpassed the talent level. What I want to see now is the talent level rise to a point where surpassing expectations means 10 plus wins and not 6. They've certainly upgraded the roster, but by how much? How will these pieces fit together? That question will be answered this season and ultimately determine whether the plan is working or not.

[Gugny]

10 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

McBeane could work out and turn the franchise into a perennial winner, but I think pumping the brakes and being critical to this point as a Bills fan(considering their dreadful last couple decades)is well warranted.... and it's not like they haven't had their ***** ups as has been pointed out(and ignored by many) on this message board.

 

So you should probably stay out of the conversation.

[Gugny]

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

So should you.

 

They cut EJ years ago brother.???

 

Yes.  I liked EJ.  You like no Bills.  You hate the team.  You hate the organization.  Your narrative is downright ***** tired.  If it's a shtick, then find another one.  Or go to another team's fan site.

[eball]

2 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

The narrative right after Rex was canned by just about everyone was their was plenty of talent on the roster and they needed to invest in a franchise QB and better coaching.

 

Rex was just a fat, walking disaster here as a HC.

 

McDermott and Beane turned what could've been a ONE year reload into a 3 to 4 year rebuild that may or may not work. 

 

 

And here you are, right on cue with your 2nd tenet of TSW posting: complaining about the rebuild rather than what you wanted to see happen. Wahhhhhhh. 

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

They took an approach to blow up the roster and rebuild the team which may or may not work. 

 

Some here make it the gospel that this was the ONLY WAY to go about things and that a 4 year rebuild was a necessity and that the Bills have already arrived. The reality is it wasn't at all and I know you get absolutely destroyed if your critical of the new "top 5" regime, but to this point, like the regimes before them, they've been mediocre to bad.

 

McBeane could work out and turn the franchise into a perennial winner, but I think pumping the brakes and being critical to this point as a Bills fan(considering their dreadful last couple decades)is well warranted.... and it's not like they haven't had their ***** ups as has been pointed out(and ignored by many) on this message board. 

?

 

Come on John. Coming from the guy who's been preaching that the tire fire that are the Sabres should stay the course?

I'll repeat the general point I have said about McDermott and his hiring. He was hired based on how he would differently run the football operation compared to the prior Whaley regime . He presented a plan that was the antithesis of the Whaley approach and was the candidate who was hired based on that plan. Now you and some of your associates act surprised that the designed plan that he laid out prior to his hiring was actually implemented

 

Was there a different and better approach? That is a hypothetical question that can't be answered. What I can say is that in his first year with a stripped down team he made the playoffs for the first time in a generation. You might find fault with that outcome but I don't. This offseason the Bills were in a cap flexible situation that enabled them to be aggressive in the free agent market. Again, that was part of their plan regarding restructuring the team's cap structure. You may consider their endeavor a failure but I consider it a success. 

 

With respect to the hockey team you obviously were not paying attention or misunderstood what I was advocating for. I have said for a long time that there was no quick fix to the problem of the lack of talent on the roster. I have steadfastly emphasized the necessity of developing the young talent in the system and adding talent when you can. I am more optimistic than most of the hockey team's near future prospects. And by the way I thought the Krueger hire was a terrific hire. 

[LSHMEAB]

29 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

The narrative right after Rex was canned by just about everyone was their was plenty of talent on the roster and they needed to invest in a franchise QB and better coaching.

 

Yeah. Narratives tend to change as decisions are made. THAT'S what they needed to do.

 

I would have preferred a different approach, but they've got a shot to see this through and I'm hopeful that they know what they're doing. This is the year the plan should bear fruit. I'm gonna have very little faith if 2019 is another middling year.

Edited May 17, 2019 by LSHMEAB

[Gugny]

4 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

I was replying to John and you jumped in. If you don't like my posts put me on ignore. 

 

Seems like you are the one crying. You complain about my posts all the time but don't ignore me? 

 

There's a trend, here.

[eball]

11 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

I was replying to John and you jumped in. If you don't like my posts put me on ignore. 

Seems like you are the one crying. You complain about my posts all the time but don't ignore me? 

 

I actually believe most people are capable of reasonable thought, so I keep giving you an opportunity. You’re testing that hypothesis. 

[BADOLBILZ]

5 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

There's a trend, here.

 

 

Is it that Jacob de Grom got shelled tonight and you had a tantrum moments later in the thread?   

[Thurman#1]

7 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

Yes. I would have done everything possible to retain Woods and moved some money around elsewhere. I would have kept Watkins and not acquired Kelvin Benjamin. It would have been great if they were organizationally in position to draft a QB, in which case they would have cut Tyrod making the salary cap issue ENTIRELY moot. 

 

Yeah, you're wrong about that.

 

Again, they were in crappy cap shape. 

 

And if you would have kept them in crappy cap shape if you were GM, that's fine. I find it hard to care even enough to send up a short prayer you're not the GM. It's too obvious why you're not. Not acquiring Kelvin Benjamin is supposed to save us all the money to get us out of cap trouble? Um, he was on a rookie contract. He cost us a bit over $1 mill while he was here. Keeping Watkins would have cost us a ton, as would the rest of your moves. You'd have had us right back in the cap crap and unable to do with the OL what Beane has.

 

Which is fine. But it also points out why nobody's paying you to make football decisions.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

 

The point of my contention is that they COULD have kept Woods and I believe the cap stuff is completely overblown. They couldn't have kept Gilmore. That I'll concede.

 

For better or worse, they made these decisions. I like many of them and question many of them. Their fate will ultimately be tied to wins and losses. I think we can all agree on that. They decided to tear the whole thing down and start from scratch. The last time we did that was back in the early 2000's with TD. It almost worked.

 

McDermott did an amazing job with a below average roster in 2017 and actually made the playoffs, albeit at 9-7 and one & done. Last season, McDermott eked 6 wins out of a TERRIBLE roster. This is the season I want to see it all come together. I'm really not down with the whole 5 year plan.

 

I'm actually higher on McDermott than most. The blowouts are alarming, but the end result has been a win total that surpassed the talent level. What I want to see now is the talent level rise to a point where surpassing expectations means 10 plus wins and not 6. They've certainly upgraded the roster, but by how much? How will these pieces fit together? That question will be answered this season and ultimately determine whether the plan is working or not.

 

 

Yeah, I got your point. You're right they could have kept Woods. At the cost of being in worse cap shape. You're wrong that the cap stuff was overblown.

 

Again, Beane told the Pegulas at his interview that they were in crappy cap shape and that they were going to have to suffer, and promised that he would get them in excellent cap shape by the start of this season. The Pegulas were right with them, and it is one of the reasons they hired him. If they hadn't liked that idea, they'd have hired someone else, someone with views closer to yours. But they didn't. 

 

So you may not be down with the whole five year plan. But the Pegulas were very down with the understanding that the first two years were going to suck, and that the whole thing would take time.